Nuclear Weapons Treaty

Your April 30 editorial on renewing the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty failed to underscore a very important point: The main objective of the treaty is to help nations acquire and use nuclear technology for medical and commercial purposes. In exchange for this privilege, the non-nuclear weapons states must forswear the development of or trade in nuclear weapons. And for the 25-year life of the original agreement this has worked very well.

Of the 30 nations which obtain electricity from nuclear power plants, only seven have nuclear weapons capability. Dozens more countries have research reactors and other nuclear facilities designed and used for peaceful purposes.

The treaty controls trade in essentially all nuclear materials by establishing rules for assessing whether importing countries are in compliance. This has provided a stabilizing influence to nuclear commerce and prevented numerous disputes. The treaty is significant for the U.S., as we enjoy a growing trade in peaceful nuclear technology with Japan, China and other countries. The non-proliferation accord must be renewed indefinitely because of its critical importance in both controlling the spread of nuclear weapons and in fostering the use of peaceful nuclear technology. Without the treaty there will be that much less security in the world and less economic growth.

THEODORE M. BESMANN Ph.D.

Research Group Leader

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Oak Ridge, Tenn.

Your editorial lauds U.S. and Russian cuts in nuclear arms. Yes, tremendous strides have been made, but let’s get our figures and priorities on track. The Times cites a post-START II strategic stockpile of 3,500 nuclear bombs. But that’s just deployed weapons. When you add reserve stockpiles and tactical cruise missiles, the true projected U.S. stockpile in the year 2003 is 8,500 weapons.

Unfortunately, the U.S. is not seeking further nuclear cuts but preparing for a new generation of nuclear bombs. President Clinton’s new 1996 budget asks for a 9.2% increase in nuclear weapon activities including $50 million for tritium production and $64 million for the National Ignition Facility. Both programs are to be used in developing new atomic bombs. At the United Nations last year, Boris Yeltsin implored the U.S. to join Russia in making further strategic cuts and Clinton refused. With radioactive debris still haunting us from the last Cold War, why is the U.S. still riding this apocalyptic horse?

JONATHAN PARFREY

Executive Director, Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility

Santa Monica